Simultaneous Acquisition of Words and Syntax: Effects of Exposure Condition and Declarative Memory

Abstract

This study examined the simultaneous acquisition of vocabulary and grammar by adult learners and the role of exposure condition and declarative memory. Most experimental studies investigating the acquisition of artificial or natural languages focus on either vocabulary or grammar, but not both. However, a systematic investigation of the simultaneous learning of multiple linguistic features is important given that it mirrors language learning outside the lab. Native English speakers were exposed to an artificial language under either incidental or intentional exposure conditions. Participants had to learn both novel pseudowords and word order patterns while also processing stimulus sentences for meaning. The results showed that adult learners are able to rapidly acquire basic syntactic information of a novel language while processing the input for meaning (plausibility judgments) and attempting to learn novel vocabulary at the same time. The results further indicated that exposure condition (incidental versus intentional) made no difference in terms of either vocabulary or grammar learning gains. Findings also revealed that learners developed explicit, not implicit, knowledge of lexis and syntax. Finally, the results indicated that individuals’ declarative memory capacity was not related to vocabulary learning but only to grammar learning. Our study underscores the importance of studying the simultaneous acquisition of different language features and from different perspectives of comprehension versus production, incidental versus intentional learning conditions, implicit/explicit knowledge, and individual differences in cognitive abilities.

Learning Condition, Linguistic Complexity, and First Language Transfer in Semiartificial Language Learning

“…As one anonymous reviewer pointed out, language production is barely investigated in L2 research that employs (semi)artificial languages. To our knowledge, Ruiz et al (2018) is the only study so far that elicited sentence production data alongside grammaticality judgment data. In that study, the participants in both the incidental and intentional conditions predominantly produced simple sentences on the production task (incidental: 86%; intentional: 92%), and the two groups did not perform differently accuracy-wise in sentence production or grammaticality judgment.…”

The effects of working memory and declarative memory on instructed second language vocabulary learning: Insights from intelligent CALL

“…Another plausible explanation for nonsignificant results may be that, while declarative memory affects grammar learning differently as a function of proficiency (e.g., Hamrick, 2015;Morgan-Short et al, 2014), acquiring L2 lexical knowledge is predicted to be always dependent on the declarative memory system, regardless of learners' L2 proficiency level . Consequently, having greater declarative memory capacity may not provide a significant advantage when learning more arbitrary features of language (i.e., lexical learning) (Ruiz et al, 2018). It follows that strict interpretations of theoretical predictions may not be as clear-cut.…”

“…In second or foreign language (L2) learning, they have been shown to have great explanatory power in accounting for learning outcomes (Pawlak, 2017). However, despite extensive research on the potential effects of individual differences on L2 learning (see Li, 2017a;Pawlak, 2017, for recent reviews), there are still relatively few studies that have explored the interaction between individual differences and instructional conditions or treatments (e.g., Ando et al, 1992;Tagarelli et al, 2015;Ruiz et al, 2018;Benson and DeKeyser, 2018;Faretta-Stutenberg and Morgan-Short, 2018;Indrarathne and Kormos, 2018;Malone, 2018;Suzuki and DeKeyser, 2017; see Granena and Yilmaz, 2018;Vatz et al, 2013, for reviews). This kind of interactional research (Li, 2017a) examines the extent to which pedagogical treatments are more or less effective depending on learners' personal characteristics or aptitudes, such as personality (Jackson, 2019), learning styles (Grey et al, 2015), language aptitude , working memory (Indrarathne and Kormos, 2018), and declarative memory or procedural memory (Faretta-Stutenberg and Morgan-Short, 2018), to name but a few.…”

Measuring individual differences in cognitive abilities in the lab and on the web

“…Individual differences can greatly affect how we acquire and process language [1–3] and mediate and/moderate the effectiveness of instruction [4]. In adult language learning, for example, learners’ cognitive abilities have great explanatory power in accounting for differences in learning outcomes ([5–6]).…”